Curated research library of TV news clips regarding the NSA, its oversight and privacy issues, 2009-2014

Click "More / Share / Borrow" for each clip's source context and citation link. HTML5 compatible browser required

Primary curation & research: Robin Chin, Internet Archive TV News Researcher; using TV News Archive service.

Speakers

Chuck Grassley
U.S. Senator, Judiciary Committee Ranking Member
CSPAN 07/31/2013
Grassley: evaluate the wisdom and value of the intelligence programs. However, Congress needs accurate information to conduct oversight responsibilities that the constitution demands that we do under our checks and balances of government. That is why it was especially disturbing to see that the director of national intelligence was forced to apologize for inaccurate statements he made last march before senate intelligence committee. Those statements concern one of the important programs will be hearing about
Chuck Grassley
U.S. Senator, Judiciary Committee Ranking Member
CSPAN 07/31/2013
Grassley continued: This very day. Nothing can excuse this kind of behavior from a senior administration official of any administration. Especially on matters of such great importance. We have a constitutional duty to protect American’s privacy. That’s a given. We also have an equal Constitutional responsibility to ensure that the government provides a strong national defense. That’s a given. Intelligence gathering is of course a vital part of that defense.
Chuck Grassley
U.S. Senator, Judiciary Committee Ranking Member
CSPAN 07/31/2013
Grassley, Cole, Litt, Inglis: Cole: Nobody is listening to anybody's conversations through this program and through program, nobody could. No information like that is being collected through this program. Grassley: Mr. Litt, section 215 contains a requirement that records collected under the program, and --on be relevant to authorized investigation. As a legal matter, how can you justify the assertion that phone records of millions of Americans who have nothing to do with terrorism are relevant to an authorized investigation under section
Chuck Grassley
U.S. Senator, Judiciary Committee Ranking Member
CSPAN 07/31/2013
Grassley, Cole, Litt continued 1: Grassley: section 215? Litt: I begin by noting number of judges repeatedly over the years have found that these records are in fact, relevant. The reason is the standard of relevance we are talking about here is not the kind of relevance you think about in the Perry mason sense of the criminal trial. It is a much broader standard of relevance and in a number of circumstances such as civil discovery, it is a well accepted concept that if you need to get a large group
Chuck Grassley
U.S. Senator, Judiciary Committee Ranking Member
CSPAN 07/31/2013
Grassley, Cole, Litt continued 3: Litt: records are relevant. Grassley: Is there any legal precedent that supports such a broad definition of relevance to an investigation? Litt: I’d actually defer that to the Deputy Attorney General Grassley: OK Cole: The legal precedent comes from the history of all the orders that have been issued. The courts having looked at this under the FISA law and under the provisions of 215 and making sure that under the provision (of 215)
Chuck Grassley
U.S. Senator, Judiciary Committee Ranking Member
CSPAN 07/31/2013
Grassley, Cole, Litt continued 4: Cole: (of 215) and the ability to get these records relevant to a criminal, rather– a foreign intelligence investigation, they have gone through the law that Mr.. Litt has described. On I believe 34 different occasions to do this analysis. So that legal precedent is there.
James Cole
Deputy US Attorney General
CSPAN 08/01/2013
I want to make absolutely sure that I understand the scope of 215. First Question. What information does the government collect under this program, and specifically, is anyone's name, address, social security number, or location collected? Cole: Senator Grassley, first, to answer the second part, name, address, location social security number is not collected
Chuck Grassley
U.S. Senator, Judiciary Committee Ranking Member
CSPAN2 10/02/2013
Even with all the checks and balances built into the system these kinds of errors can still occur. Even more unsettling other reports since July have suggested that there have been cases of intentional and willful misuse of intelligence authorities by NSA employees to spy on their spouses and neighbors.
Chuck Grassley
U.S. Senator, Judiciary Committee Ranking Member
CSPAN2 10/02/2013
these disclosures have created broader crisis of trust in the legitimacy of our intelligence gathering methods, generally. In my view, had these programs been more transparent from the start, this trust deficit that the American people have wouldn't be as severe as it is now.
Chuck Grassley
U.S. Senator, Judiciary Committee Ranking Member
CSPAN2 10/02/2013
instances where the NSA employees abused their authorities. It was heartening to see how few cases of intentional misconduct exists but on the other hand it's alarming to know that the possibility of employees engaging in such behavior turns out to be very real. The NSA inspectors general's response to my letter reflected that many of these cases were referred to the Department of Justice for possible criminal prosecution.
Showing 1 through 10 of 10
Page 1 2